ArticleTurkish journal of emergency medicine
Does apneic oxygenation with nasopharyngeal cannula during intubation improve the oxygenation in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure compared to the standard bag valve mask preoxygenation? An open-labeled randomized control trial.
Article in Turkish journal of emergency medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preoxygenation strategies before intubation in patients with acute hypoxic respiratory failure: a network meta-analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Emergency department airway management-2026: EMAT clinical policy guideline.Turkish journal of emergency medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesIn the context of acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF), ensuring effective preoxygenation and apneic oxygenation emerges as the pivotal approach ensuring for averting hypoxemic adverse events during endotracheal intubation. To investigate this, we conducted an open-label randomized controlled trial, aiming to assess the comparative effectiveness of nasopharyngeal high-flow oxygenation in conjunction with Bag-Valve-Mask (BVM) versus standard BVM preoxygenation in patients experiencing AHRF within the emergency department (ED).
methodsThis prospective single-center, open-labeled, randomized controlled trial enrolled patients aged 18 years and above requiring rapid sequence intubation due to AHRF in the ED. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to either the intervention arm (involving nasopharyngeal high-flow oxygenation and BVM preoxygenation) or the control arm (involving BVM preoxygenation alone).
resultsA total of 76 participants were enrolled in the study, evenly distributed with 38 individuals in each arm. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) SpO
conclusionThe primary outcome revealed no statistically significant difference between the two arms. However, patients in the intervention arm exhibited fewer intubation-related adverse effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.